Rationality And Humanity Of Enterprise Management

The object of social science research is human beings, who are conscious and dynamic. To this end, we try to find common ground from complex social activities and make people behave understandably. The assumption of human nature is produced in this way, in which the rational man hypothesis of economics has the greatest influence. This assumption holds that everyone has the advantage of avoiding disadvantages, and can choose the way of maximizing profits through the calculation of cost and income.

The method of economic analysis has wide implications. This is not only because the judgment of rational self interest is consistent with life experience, easy to be understood and accepted, but also because of the economic theory based on this hypothesis, it has made a logical explanation for many social phenomena and can be successfully used to predict people's behavior.

As an economic organization, enterprises are closely related to economics. The management of enterprises aimed at improving the micro economic benefits is directly influenced by the economic thought. People try to explain the law of enterprise management from the hypothesis of rational man pursuing maximum benefit. According to this kind of thinking, enterprises are interpreted as an organizational form of improving input and output based on Rationality: people set up enterprises from the purpose of maximizing their own interests, and choose the way of behavior in enterprises according to the possible ways of realizing interests. Therefore, management, economic management and enterprise management are essentially the same.

Further, what is the content of interest as a motivation for people? How to combine the understanding of interests with the practice of enterprise management? For a long time, this is regarded as an issue of no question. In fact, people actually acquiesce in that the interest in promoting people's behavior is economic income, especially money income. For example, Taylor, one of the founders of modern management, regards the adjustment of employees' wages as the main support for their scientific management. The reason is very simple: under the condition that the material life conditions of society are not abundant and the price mechanism dominates the way of economic activities, it is a natural choice to raise monetary income as the main motivation.

Correspondingly, in the practice of enterprise management, how to make use of employees' pursuit of economic income to achieve the goal of enterprise benefit. Become the basic idea of management. That is to say, a basic assumption of management is that employees are not interested in the work itself, and only passively work to get their income. Therefore, in order to raise the cost and benefit of work, they will naturally have the tendency to do less work and get more money. Therefore, the fundamental task of enterprise management is to supervise employees' work and make the completion of work become the basis for payment of remuneration. Management functions such as planning, organization, command and control come into being.

Under this guidance, managers and managers are in a position of separation and opposition. Managers carry out command and control from the interests of enterprises, employees receive their tasks and supervision from their own interests, and enterprises are rational machines built by managers to make use of employees' egoistic nature. The purpose is to better achieve enterprise benefits. The management methods used can be roughly divided into two types: stick and carrot policy. This is an in-depth study and analysis of &#183, and is summarized by X theory.

However, this kind of management has encountered a difficult problem. No matter whether the tough supervision measures are taken or the interest inducement is being carried out, it is becoming more and more insufficient for the employees to work hard. Where is the reason? Management practice has promoted the theoretical thinking of &#183. What is extraordinary is that it is not just a matter of fact, but a systematic reflection of many phenomena. From a philosophical point of view, it raises the question of world outlook and methodology: if employees do exist egoistic tendencies to avoid job responsibility, is this tendency natural or acquired? If this tendency is not inherent, but from the acquired environment, is the original management mode appropriate? Obviously, this is a thorough reflection on management principles.

In this regard, &#183 proposed an enlightening hypothesis: the negative attitude of employees to work can not be the reason for adopting supervisory management, but on the contrary is the result of supervisory management. This was a completely new idea at that time. Because this idea negates the basic assumptions of traditional management, it is enough to challenge the entire management sector. Because of this, &#183 has played an important role in the history of management thought.

Of course, it is not enough to put forward some bold idea only. On the basis of the theory of demand, &#183 first analyzes the causes of management difficulties. In his view, the failure of the stick and the carrot policy is due to the one-sided understanding of the needs of the employees, only to see the material life needs of the employees, and do not see the employees' social feelings and self achievement needs. This one-sided nature is related to the poverty of material life. Once the material conditions are abundant, employees will take the lead in social and achievement needs. Under such circumstances, the traditional supervisory management is out of order. Based on this analysis, the &#183 Y theory is different from the X theory. This theory emphasizes that in the human needs, how to establish friendship, gain self-esteem, self-confidence and independence, so as to constantly achieve their sense of achievement is extremely important. Because these needs are often realized in the work, so for the employees, the work itself is also attractive, the key is how to make this attraction manifest. The problem of traditional management lies in not killing but killing script src=>